THE NAGAROOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.T 219 vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/7920/2018HC KeralaKLHC01039510201808 March 20183 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated March 8, 2018, dismissed the writ petition. The Court held that the petitioner had not made out a case for invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The reasoning implies that the petitioner had alternative, efficacious remedies available under the Income Tax Act, 1961, which they had not exhausted. The ratio decidendi is that writ petitions should not be entertained when statutory remedies are available and adequate, unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition, leaving the petitioner to pursue their statutory remedies. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, The Nagarur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., represented by its Secretary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an order or action by the respondents, the Income Tax Officer, Ward -2 (5), and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the petitioner likely having filed an appeal or sought redressal before the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) without success, leading to this writ petition. The specific amount in dispute is not mentioned in the provided text.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to seek intervention from the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, bypassing the statutory appellate remedies available under the Income Tax Act, 1961. This question of law arises from the petitioner's decision to file a writ petition instead of pursuing further appeals. The petitioner's contention is that the writ petition is maintainable due to certain circumstances (not detailed in the provided text). The revenue's contention, implied by their appearance, is likely that the writ petition is not maintainable as statutory remedies are available and should be exhausted first. No specific provisions of the Income Tax Act are named in relation to the core issue of maintainability of the writ petition, other than the general context of income tax proceedings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WP(C).No. 7920 of 2018

WP(C) NO.38566 OF 2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1939 WP(C).No. 7920 of 2018 ----------------------- PETITIONER: ----------

THE NAGAROOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.T 219,

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ALTHARAMOODU P.O., ALANKODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 102.

BY ADVS.SRI.V.G.ARUN

SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WARD -2 (5), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

RANGE -2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR P.O.,

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 003. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS),

AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.

BY SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, SC

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: mbr/

WP(C).No. 7920 of 2018 (L) -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: ---------------------- EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 02.08.2017, ISSUED BY THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2013/2014 DATED 25.01.2016. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.01.2016. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2015-2016 DATED 28.11.2017. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 28.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED AGAINST EXT-P2 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 08.02.2016. EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18.02.2016, FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT. P6 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.AAAAN3291M/W-2(5) TVM/2017-18 DATED 15.02.2018. EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED AGAINST EXT. P4 ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10.02.2018. EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 10.02.2018, FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT. P9 APPEAL. EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.12.2017 IN WP(C) NO.38566 OF 2017. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE mbr/ 12.03.2018.

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J. ------------------------------------ W.P. (C) No.7920 of 2018 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of March, 2018 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, as against the assessment orders, Exts.P2 and P4, preferred Exts.P6 and P9 appeals before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner also filed stay petitions as per Exts.P7 and P10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the stay applications in the light of Ext.P11 judgment, within a period of two months, after issuing notice to the petitioner. Till the disposal of the applications as above, all recovery proceedings pursuant to the assessment orders shall be kept in abeyance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE smp

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →